1. - In the writ application, the important question that arises for consideration is with respect to permissibility of the direct recruitment which was made under the advertisement dated 21.12.1996 and also under the advertisement dated 31.10.1994, which was challenged later-on by way of amendment in the year 2010. Prayer has also been made to quash the appointment orders dated 2.8.1996 appointing 7 incumbents; dated 20.4.1998 appointing 10 incumbents; dated 28.11.1998 appointing Shri Uma Kant Agarwal; and dated 11.1.2002 appointing Shri Ganga Ram Moolchandani. All these appointments were made pursuant to the advertisements dated 31.10.1994 and 21.12.1996.

2. The writ application no.139/97 was filed by Sarva Shri Deepak Maheshwari, Umesh Kumar Sharma, Anil Kumar Mishra, Ajay Kumar Jain and Vijay Kumar Vyas. Initially, a prayer was made to quash the advertisement dated 21.12.1996 advertising 11 vacancies to be filled by way of direct recruitment. Prayer was also made in the unamended writ application to fill-up the temporary vacancies by resorting to Rule 22 of The Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 1969"). Prayer was als